Welcome to Talk Classical - A community covering every aspect of classical music!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community you will have access to post topics, upload content and access many other features. Registration is absolutely free so please, join our classical music forums!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

I've noticed a lot of these "of all time" and "in the world" threads. I find it really difficult to answer these questions in any real way. A friend and I are trying to coax a mutual other friend into the world of classical music. Our "newbie" friend asked for a list (orally) of
20th century composers that he should know about, we were able to rattle off a list of 50 or so in two minutes flat. Actual thinking would have provided hundreds.

So of all the thousands and thousands of symphonies ever written, which one is the most beautiful? Who knows, and while I have a few dozen favorites, mine are going to emotionally be very different than any one elses.

I've noticed a lot of these "of all time" and "in the world" threads. I find it really difficult to answer these questions in any real way. A friend and I are trying to coax a mutual other friend into the world of classical music. Our "newbie" friend asked for a list (orally) of
20th century composers that he should know about, we were able to rattle off a list of 50 or so in two minutes flat. Actual thinking would have provided hundreds.

So of all the thousands and thousands of symphonies ever written, which one is the most beautiful? Who knows, and while I have a few dozen favorites, mine are going to emotionally be very different than any one elses.

The beauty of a forum is that you get many different opinions, you can try them all out, and eventually you will agree with at least one of the member's suggestions. You're quite right, everyone will have a different opinion but that's just the point.

Thank you all for your suggestions they have all been excellent. I have checked some of them out and really like what I hear. I have really had a craving for music that could be described as: Dark brooding Pantomime, deep haunting symphony, a sea of intangible, unsettling, subtle mystery. Bizarre I know, but it would be outstanding to eventually find it.

I've noticed a lot of these "of all time" and "in the world" threads. I find it really difficult to answer these questions in any real way.

Point well made, especially in light of the fact that this forum is filled to the brim with top-10 lists.

A more specific criticism: what is the difference between "haunting" and "beautiful" and "favourite"? I think the phrasing of the question ("haunting and beautiful") is a little too wordy, it's trying to be se specific that it actually becomes rather vague.

That said, I will attempt an answer, at least for the "haunting" part. I find Berlioz Symphonie Fantastique haunting, firstly because it's supposed to be and secondly because the orchestral colours he creates to bring forth the expressiveness of his themes is in my opinion unmatched in the History of the Haunted Symphony.

Sorry to disappoint you, but this isn't necessarily true, and in fact is not likely to be true. Most people can't be bothered to answer such simple questions as the one you posed, and the odd few that do so means that you are getting a self-selecting sample of opinion which is not worth the paper it's written on.

A lot of "beginners" or people who have very superficial understandings of classical music and what it is all about, often think that it has plenty of "beautiful" or "Haunting" tunes. And indeed those are some of the words one can use to DESCRIBE a few aspects of a portion of the Classical oeuvre. It is however by no means a fair description of the genre. This is even more true for Symphonies. I wonder how many symphonists really wanted to create the effects of "Beautiful" and "haunting" melodies, of course, there are some, Tchaikovsky and Kallinikov comes to my mind. But, in the great tradition of German symphonists, be it Beethoven, Mozart, Mahler, Bruckner, etc.... I really have a hard time imagining that those masters would focus on tunes more so than development. I think development is something that is more interesting to look at. The nice tunes are nice, but they are pretty superficial, and becomes boring pretty quick. But, how Beethoven constructed a 4 movement symphony using a simple four-note rhythmic motif provides almost endless fascination.

As to the "various opinions" on which Artemis takes issue, I have to agree with him. For those of us who have been here and at other forums for a long time, the "top-10-type" threads and the "favourite-so-and-so" threads are everywhere, but they seldom lead to any type of discussion from which anyone learns anything. People most often take them as a chance to trumpet their tastes (with no explanation or argument) and perhaps grab a "free" post.

But that said, these types of threads are a basic part of forum life. They've been here since the beginning and they're here to stay.

Gustav brings up a good point... however, while discussing development details is great, threads like these are equally important. In particular, threads like these can get the ball rolling on deeper issues, such as when something like the following occurs:

"What is the most haunting and beautiful symphony of all time?"
"Bruckner's fourth, because of his great use of the recurring horn-call motif"
"Ah! What do you like about how he develops it?"

Sorry to disappoint you, but this isn't necessarily true, and in fact is not likely to be true. Most people can't be bothered to answer such simple questions as the one you posed, and the odd few that do so means that you are getting a self-selecting sample of opinion which is not worth the paper it's written on.

but mine was not written upon paper. therefore, according to your criteria, it is quite valuable.

Gustav brings up a good point... however, while discussing development details is great, threads like these are equally important. In particular, threads like these can get the ball rolling on deeper issues, such as when something like the following occurs:

"What is the most haunting and beautiful symphony of all time?"
"Bruckner's fourth, because of his great use of the recurring horn-call motif"
"Ah! What do you like about how he develops it?"

And the Bruckner fan answers, and voilà, a discussion on development.

In an ideal world, and ideal place for discussion, we should see less thread like these, which deals with really superficial aspects of music. I said "Development" as an example, of the many things people can talk about, and have a more interesting discussion on. Therefore, I don't believe threads like these are "important" at all, i.e. people don't get anything out of it. Do you learn more by knowing a certain symphonic movement has a really nice "haunting" passage? I doubt it. Even without going into the more "technical" aspect of classical music, we can still make interesting discussions simply by saying what we "get" from listening to certain pieces of music, and why you like it and why didn't.